Adjust left or right channel levels in dB for a stereo clip to balance or pan its audio in a Premiere Pro timeline.
Left/right channel levels (dB) of a stereo clip, e.g. to balance or pan it
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| leftDb | No | ||
| rightDb | No | ||
| clipIndex | Yes | Clip index on the track, 0-based from the left (see get_timeline_clips) | |
| trackIndex | Yes | Audio track index, 0-based (A1 = 0) |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It implies a mutation (setting levels) and specifies dB units, but does not disclose permissions required, whether changes are reversible, how mono clips are handled, the valid range, or what happens when only one channel is provided.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
It is a single short sentence with no waste, and the core information is front-loaded. It is efficient but slightly under-specified for a mutation tool.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a 4-parameter mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is too sparse. It omits behavioral details such as error conditions, range constraints, stereo-only applicability, and how this differs from set_clip_volume.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is 50%; clipIndex and trackIndex are documented in the schema. The description adds meaning for the undocumented leftDb and rightDb parameters by identifying them as left/right channel levels in dB. It does not specify the valid range (schema max 15, no min) or default behavior when a channel is omitted.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description states the resource (left/right channel levels of a stereo clip) and unit (dB), making the purpose clear. It does not explicitly differentiate from the sibling set_clip_volume or get_clip_volume, so an agent must infer that this affects channel balance rather than overall volume.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The phrase 'e.g. to balance or pan it' gives an example use case, which implies when to use the tool. However, there is no explicit comparison to alternatives like set_clip_volume or fade_clip_volume, and no when-not guidance.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.